Iran Disputes Trump’s Claims on Strait of Hormuz Agreement as Regional Tensions Persist

Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf has publicly refuted claims made by former U.S. President Donald Trump regarding the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, escalating diplomatic tensions over the critical maritime passage that serves as a lifeline for global oil markets.

In a strongly worded message posted on social media platforms X and Telegram late Friday, Ghalibaf accused Trump of making seven false statements within a single hour concerning the Strait of Hormuz and associated ceasefire arrangements. The Iranian official directly challenged the U.S. narrative surrounding the waterway’s operational status and the broader terms of regional de-escalation.

“Washington did not win the war with these lies, and they will certainly not get anywhere in negotiations either,” Ghalibaf wrote, dismissing any suggestion that the United States had gained diplomatic leverage through public statements.

The Parliament Speaker emphasized that vessel movement through the strategic waterway would not continue under ongoing blockade conditions. He clarified that all maritime traffic would be required to follow routes established by Tehran and coordinate directly with Iranian forces—a significant departure from the unrestricted passage typically expected in international waters.

Among the most contentious claims was Trump’s assertion that Iran had agreed to surrender its stockpile of enriched uranium—a crucial component of its nuclear program. Ghalibaf categorically rejected this claim as fabricated. The denial was later reinforced by a spokesman for Iran’s Parliamentary National Security Committee in statements to Al Jazeera, underscoring Tehran’s united position on the matter.

The Strait of Hormuz, positioned between Iran and Oman, represents one of the world’s most critical maritime chokepoints. Approximately 20% of global oil shipments pass through this narrow waterway, making any disruption a significant concern for energy markets worldwide.

Iran formally announced the reopening of the Strait on April 17, following a Lebanon ceasefire that satisfied one of Tehran’s key conditions. The announcement initially triggered substantial movements in global oil markets, with Brent crude falling more than 9% to $90.38 per barrel and U.S. crude dropping 11.4% to $83.85.

However, shipping industry data suggests the situation remains far from normalized. Maritime traffic continues to operate well below pre-conflict levels, which typically averaged between 130 and 140 vessels daily. Currently, over 150 tankers remain anchored near the Strait, indicating ongoing concerns about safe passage and uncertainty regarding Iranian intentions.

The dispute over the Strait’s status reflects broader regional tensions that have intensified following conflicts in Gaza and Lebanon. Iran’s conditions for maintaining open shipping lanes appear directly linked to developments in these conflicts, creating a complex web of regional diplomacy that continues to evolve.

Financial markets have responded to these geopolitical uncertainties with characteristic volatility. Bitcoin, often viewed as a hedge during periods of geopolitical instability, traded at $77,192 at the time of reporting, showing a 3.6% increase over 24 hours. The cryptocurrency had previously crossed the $77,000 threshold on Thursday when initial headlines about the Hormuz reopening emerged, reaching its highest level since February. However, momentum toward the anticipated $80,000 mark stalled as traders began questioning the durability of the arrangement.

Energy analysts suggest that continued uncertainty over the Strait’s operational status could maintain upward pressure on oil prices in the coming weeks, potentially affecting global inflation and economic recovery efforts. The situation remains fluid, with maritime security experts closely monitoring vessel movements through the region for any signs of escalation or normalization.

As diplomatic channels continue to work toward a sustainable solution, the contrasting narratives from Tehran and Washington highlight the significant challenges in reaching a mutually acceptable arrangement for this strategically vital waterway.